Slashdot Mirror
Fedora Core 2 Dud or Dodo?
darth_silliarse writes "Linux.com have posted an interesting review Fedora Core 2, which includes reference to the now famous Windows/Fedora Core 2 dual booting "feature". My favorite quote "Unfortunately, all of FC2's admirable qualities cannot save it from its congenital defects. These range from annoyances such as broken audio drivers to the abomination known as Gnome 2.6, and are serious enough to make the Fedora Project's second litter of pups unsuitable for any use other than as laboratory animals." Quite a indictment don't you think? My fav distro is SuSE but I'm interested to hear others views about this review..."
Why people like to rag on fedora 2 for this bug, i have no clue. This bug exists in Mandrake 10, Suse 9.1, and i'm sure any other 2.6 / grub distribution. See this story.
Never had that problem with Gentoo. Moved all my machines to Gentoo and never looked back.
SUSE is also put together well; it also manages updates fine. I recommend that to all my friends. (Unless they have exotic hardware, in which case they are more interested in Gentoo's performance)
I wonder how many RedHat users switched to other distros since FC1?
Self Defense - A Human Right www.a-human-right.com
I am normally a gentoo user but slapped Fedora core 2 on an XP machine for fun. It seems to be plenty stable enough on a standard Dell and the sound appears to be working fine when I used it.
The main problems I have had are the lack of MP3 support out of the box, and no default inclusion of niceties like flash, nvidia drivers, and java (I know they are not open source but a quick-download utility to get them separately would be nice). Even some OSS software like K3B is not included by default even though I chose KDE packages at install time.
On the good side, it was stupidly simple to setup (I love gentoo but bootstrapping has never been fun and an SATA system I setup required some prestedigitation to get running) the up2date utility is simple to use and has that nifty icon tray to alert you when there are new updates. It has all the standard development utilities in relatively recent versions and while I am not a regular Gnome user the desktop seems quite polished with good fonts default out of the box.
In summation, it certainly ain't perfect, but I haven't found any real problems to complain about either. While I'll stick to Gentoo on machines that I want to develop on, Fedora seems fine for a workstation that is easy to maintain.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
I have been using FC1 on my laptop ever since it's release, and I do think it's a great distribution. I'm also a Gentoo/Debian user, and FC1 really reached my expectations. When I saw the official release of FC2, I downloaded it right away and installed it. As a result, I rolled back to FC1. FC2 sure does have a lot of improvements and uses the most recent development (X.org, KDE 3.2, Gnome 2.6, 2.6 kernel, ...), but I think they aimed a little too high. Those changes should have been made gradually and tested massively.
From the things I could not get to work (that used to work): touch pad (really, can't tap to click), XFCE4 (incompatible with xorg?), wlan card (linuxant drivers).
I sure am disapointed by this release, but I will try FC3 when it releases anyway, because it does have potential. It's probably only a matter of time before the incompatibility issues are solved.
Qui ne va pas à la chasse n'a pas de gibier
PHP Queb
Personally I am a devoted Slackware user but right now I am migrating my mom to Fedora Core2.
It's a nice system with not much overhead in the default install. You have to tweak it a bit but you can have a solid platform wich is easy to use for all daily office tasks such as browsing, printing letters and so on.
RedHats Bluecurve theme doesn't match my taste but it works great for mom and dad since it's clean and descriptive. It's also an up to date system with Kernel 2.6.5 and Gnome 2.6.
Like it or not but spatial filenavigation is the ONLY way my mom is able to keep her stuff together. She was totally lost with Windows Explorer.
One has to keep in mind that Fedora is a pretty young project, too and that there was apparently some trouble in the community communication with RedHat. The booting issue is a real pita but let's not forget that it is actually a WinXP problem. This won't make anyone more happy if he lost his Windows partition, I know but it's still the truth. So let's not be too harsh with Fedora!
Most of the text I've read in the past on linux.com is a wash -- too heavy on the histrionics and not enough on the facts. Because of this I usually avoid linux.com like the plague for facts. Furthermore it's not my first choice for finding out accurate information about distros.
;-) )
(Heh, Slashdot is way more factual
FYI, I have been using FC2 for about a week now. I'm a KDE / fluxbox user so I have no opinion on Gnome. After starting from scratch (previously was using Red Hat 9), my poor 200 Mhz / 128 Mb RAM PC is working much better. Everything else I have installed (Java 1.4, RealPlayer, MP3 support for XMMS, prboom, Timidity and so on) has been fine, no issues.
--- You are in a little twisty maze of comments, all different.
- X11 (got it to work by editing scripts)
- CD-RW drive
- Mouse (it works again after manual configuration)
- USB digital camera
- printers
- email (mutt/imap)
- sound
All this stuff worked correcly before the upgrade. However, MATLAB still works! The upgrade feature (at least) is totally screwed up. I think this machine is going to get Gentooed very soon now. To be fair, the system seems to be reasonably stable and also quite responsive (unlike RH 9). Not as responsive as my other systems using kernel 2.6 and Gentoo/Mandrake,though.Auferre trucidare rapere falsis nominibus imperium, atque ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
The review does not do justice with FC2. I didn't have any special problems with FC2, and except for the mp3 support in xmms, almost everything worked perfectly out of the box. But even with the problems mentioned in the review, I think FC2's good qualities compensate for the problems.
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xkb/rules; ln -s xorg.lst xfree86.lst". I really do wish some official fix to this will be out soon.
Gnome 2.6 rocks, and I say this after working with KDE for the past 4 years. I don't think I'll be going back to KDE soon. However, the most notable bug in KDE was the fact that you can not define other keyboard layouts than english. this is due to the switch between XFree and Xorg, and is solved by doing "cd
As for dual booting an xp partition - I had no probelm with that at all. although booting my RH9 partition took a little tweaking in grub.conf.
The best experience I had was with the sound drivers. FC2 recognized *ALL 3* sound cards i have installed on my machine, even my rather exotic 8 channel studio card, which RH9 never managed to do anything with.
After almost two weeks with FC2, I didn't feel any need to go back to RH9, which I still have installed, as FC feels more stable and fast.
I wouldn't recommend FC2 to newbies, though - those needed tweaks that took me a couple of minutes, would render FC2 useless for Newbie Joe. But then again - AFAIK this isn't a distro for newbies. I use it as a development workstation, and for this purpose it's great.
By keeping fedora buggy, RedHat is trying to show corporate customers that Free (as in beer) operating systems just won't cut it, so they can gouge them with high-priced licensing fees for their enterprise linux.
Fedora sucks, because it isn't in RH's benefit to make it anywhere near a quality product.
Once it has served the purpose, it will be put out to pasture, and RH will ship out a press release about "many other choices for hobbyists"
I've recently made the switch from Debian 'sid' to Gentoo, after frustration with certain Debian policies. I'd previously built a dual Opteron workstation with Gentoo, and found it worked so well that I rebuilt my Pentium 4 workstation with Gentoo as well.
It took 24 hours to completely recompile everything -- base package, KDE, office suites, development tools, Samba -- on a 2.8GHz Pentium 4. I didn;t find this terribly onerous, and the end result is a very clean, fast system. In spite of what some people say, I do see a significant difference in having my code compiled to the hardware it runs on. Heck, I was able to use -ffast-math for the major numerical packages -- try doing *that* with a precompiled distro. :)
I was a Debian user for several years; I still have a dual Pentium 3 and a Sun Ultra 10 running Debian 'sid'. I've used (even paid for) Red Hat, SuSE, Mandrake, and Slackware over the years. And Beyond the time spent compiling, gentoo has been the most pleasant experience yet.
The nice thing about Linxu is that there are so many distros, giving everyone what they want. For me, at this time, Gentoo works very, very well.
All about me
No offense, but sounds like Mandrake would be a better distro for you, if you're using KDE as the default and installing all the "wrong license" packages (which are already included in Mandrake).
Chris
It's not poorly tested. They know the bug they just released anyway.
Exactly, even linux geeks don't want to spend hours manually configuring sound card drivers to get rid of white noise!
But I guess, Fedora is cutting edge, so you get the bugs on it.
Personally, I've seen too many bugs in all the new distros, Gentoo, Mandrake (which had serious nforce driver issues), Fedora.
Mandrake 9 and SuSE are the most cleanest, stable and need less config time to setup.
I think install reviews need a "configuration" section, how much did you need to configure to get rid of annoyances or to get applications working. If you had to google or read a forum to fix a bug on install, the distro goes from 100% to 90%.
Maybe Linux distro's for desktop use needs quality control? It's half way through 2004, and the current batch of distros (bsd included) are configuration messes. WTF happened?
I have burnt cd's and DVD+R and RW no problem with Fedora. Tested with a Sony DRX-500UL USB 2.0/Firewire drive, a LiteON 48x and 52x CD burners. I used K3B application.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." -Albert Einstein
Karma? There's a serial modder out there.
I agree with him on gedit, the older version was better, much easier to use.
I agree on not having an easy way to edit the main menu, that is the sucks.
I agree on not having all the apps AVAILABLE on a menu someplace, how the HECK is a noob supposed to know what's on there, yet alone try it out or use it? What, there's some rule you have to be psychic? Is it too much to have a list, with an entire paragraph describing WHAT such and such an app is and what it does? One steenking human readable paragraph, just one at a minimum, connected to each app on a menu that had everything on it. That would be *nice*, real nice.
I don't have a problem with sound, sound worked right off the bat automagically, and "fixing" xmms is as easy as uncommenting the mpeg placeholder plugin, and downloading and installing the xmms-mp3 plugin, now I got shoutcast streams for my favorite ranting radio. I assume the broadband speeds music channels work as well.
video, again, no problems seeing this monitor using some old 2 meg video card. i guess I don't see a need to drop hundred or two hundred dollars to star at the same screen, and I don't do video games, so that's that. If the latest "turbovidia" whosis don't work, I really don't care. And if it's because "turbovidia, inc" won't release linux drivers, WHY would you WANT to financially support that company anyway? $%&^K 'em! why support dickhead companies with your loot? To play GAMES? Life is way too interesting to "play games", go play "real life" instead.
rhythm box, never used it. xmms rules. why mess with success? I looked at it, ehh. maybe it works, no idea. xmms is nice and small and works.
Open office I don't use, so I skipped installing it, and it was choking on it anyway. There's half a dozen more do dads/text editors to type up crap with there left over, all of them work just fine. Maybe business really needs all that crap, but I simply can't imagine how business "got along" before office this or office that. I think it's 3/4ths "office busy work" to justify more white collar workers meselfs. Don't need it. We need more widget builders, we got way too many widget organizers, managers, bosses, clerks, accountants, lawyers and "personal assistants". More real work, less "busy-ness" please. that's what worked in the past when we really were making some loot and building a middle class. WORKERS, not "busy-ness"men. Fixation on "office" crap is just that, an unnatural fixation. You don't need most of it.
xpdf displays acrobat documents OK, I've used it already. I never create any PDF, so there ya go
mozilla 1.6 is a great browser, tastes great, less filling, no probs there.
Still too many things turned on by default, a little nmap action and some new firewall rules took care of that. Well, maybe I don't know, that's why I have a stand alone "beta box" I'm on. if anything happens, poof, erase, try it again. fedora is BETA. Even a release is BETA. that is what it is designed for. FREE beta ware. It's great for that. That is a bitch I got though,back to firewalls, there needs to be a much better firewall included with some written in non-geek howtos for noobs (moi for sure) and whatnot. The default "firewall-on" leaves some stuff still open, near as I can see anyway. ya, ya, I should get a router and stuff...
Dual boot with windows? Why, what for? I don't play video games, and if I did I'd buy one of them game console things. get the right tool for the right job. And if I "needed" windows for work, I'd think about that again, especially if "da boss" insisted on it, because that proves he already makes bad business decisions and will continue to do so, so your job might be in higher jeopardy..
%^)
kde versus gnome versus some voodoo leet window installer thing. No idea, I've tried kde several times, half the apps would segfault or not even turn on. I have been underwhelmed with it. I understand for some people it's the slickest thing since 6 packs to go, but for me it's always been near-horr
... any distro that uses GNOME 2.6.
I should have written "includes GNOME 2.6". FC2 doesn't depend on GNOME, and it includes alternatives, which makes the review picking on FC2 for this even more irrelevant.
Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
Windows/Fedora Core 2 dual booting "feature" - This does not affect only Fedora, and it took about 3 minutes to fix on my pc.
My favorite quote - How can you be happy about the review making not only Fedora but linux in general look bad.
broken audio drivers - I am yet to see a distro that has 100% working audio drivers.
abomination known as Gnome 2.6 - If you dont like it that is what other desktops like KDE are for.
I'm interested to hear others views about this review... - This review sucks. It may have some good points, but there is nothing in Fedora Core 2 that cant be avoided or fixed.
First problem was that it totally botched configuring the boot manager. It took out my RH9 entries from grub.conf, but failed to add any entries for FC2. My guess is that it was confused by an entry I had for a test 2.6.0 kernel I had compiled to play with when contemplating just updating RH9 to 2.6 myself.
I don't recall all the other specific problems I had, but basically I spent all day tracking down and fixing little things that didn't work, after I fixed the bad grub.conf.
The most annoying is that it does not install the policy stuff. This causes RPM to give an error about some missing file every time you install an RPM. This error seemed to confuse up2date, because that hung every time it went to install RPMs. Yum was also broken. I had Yum installed from Fedora Legacy, and apparently that is a later version than the one in FC2, so FC2 does not update it, but it does update some libraries that Yum depends on to versions that Yum doesn't like. So, you have to "rpm -e yum" by hand, and then install Yum from the FC2 disc to get a working Yum.
After doing that I tried to use yum to bring things up to date, and that failed because of a dependency problem with php-manual. php-manual depends on a specif version of php, and so yum could not update that version of php. Again, I suspect that this came from Fedora Legacy.
I also gave FC2 a try at home, as a fresh install on my second disk. It handled most of my hardware, except for my soundcard. I have an Asus P4PE with onboard sound. It is supposedly supported by ALSA, but no sound plays.
There were a few other minor problems, but none of the total hell from the RH9 upgrade test. Still, I am pretty unimpressed by the state of disorganization of the overall Fedora project. For example, there's no obvious mention of Fedora Legacy on Redhat's Fedora site. The Fedora.us site contains a bunch of useful information also not on the Redhat site.
So, I figured that if I am going to have to install from scratch (which I can do--I've got good backups of all my data), I might as well take a look at SuSE. I bought 9.1. So far, my test installs have gone OK, except for one major problem: it doesn't work under VMWare! As soon as the kernel starts loading during install, the keyboard goes away. I was going to try it with a USB keyboard to see if that made a difference, but I can't even get VMWare to boot when I have USB 1.x support in my RH9 system. (RH9 has serious USB problems. It works great mostly with USB2 devices (although occasionally I've had to reboot to get a disk to show up as a /dev/sdX device, even though it is showing up on lsusb)), but sometimes fails to load the USB 1.x modules, so they need to be loaded manually. However, when I do that, things that use USB get very slow to load).
However, tests on my second disk worked fairly well with SuSE, with two problems.
First, it has the same soundcard problem FC2 does. I thought it might be a 2.6 kernel problem, but Knoppix with 2.6 finds it fine and plays sound. Doing some experimenting, I have determined that the snd-intel8x0 module simply does not work right. However, the i810-audio module works (which is what Knoppix uses). So, all I have to do is let SuSE configure my soundcard, and then change the module loading stuff from snd-intel8x0 to i810-audio. (That didn't work on FC2 because the kernel shipped with FC2 doesn't include that module. I have to rebuild the kernel to enable OSS...another strike against FC2, since I want to be able to use the kernel from the distro). (Another thing they didn't configure into FC2 is Firewire. Enough computers nowadays include that that I don't understand how they cannot include modular Firewire support).
The only other SuSE problem I saw in my tests was X configuration. Even though they have an entry for my monitor (Gateway
Sorry to jump so late into the conversation, but I am extremely impressed with Fedora Core 2. It's by far the smoothest and most well-integrated linux distro I've used.
The fonts look great. The mime handlers are set up right so I get sensible options to handle files that I download from a web browser. Thunderbird comes integrated with gpg.
Nautilus is just bizarrely fast - and I rather like the spatial thing. Spatial nautilus is terrible for just browsing a filesystem, but for doing real work like moving files around it's great. (And if you want to just browse, select "Browse filesystem.") I can type smb://wherever from the "run" dialog and have it browse windows servers. Great stuff.
And in general, Gnome 2.0 is very nice looking and user-friendly. It opens my files fine, it has software to to just about everything I use a computer for. For the first time ever, a newly installed distro has the feel of a computer that a real expert worked on, installing all the interesting plugins, getting stuff properly integrated, doing the little tweaks that I always had to do myself (Or more likely never bothered to do and just put up with minor inconveniences).
Maybe I'm just getting old, but I want a distro that I can install and just use. The only real customization I've had to do was manually install gdesklets and beep-media-player and get lm_sensors working. (The latter failed because my sensors aren't supported under 2.6 kernels yet.)
With yum, between the main repository and freshrpms, I have just about anything I might want to install.
Compared to my gentoo-using friends, I feel almost guilty about how easy it is to use, as if I was a Windows user or something.
It's just a fine distro, in my opinion. It reflects the hard work of a lot of generous people, and this review is unreasonably mean-spirited.
I was a RH - then Mandrake - junkie from 1998 until 2003. Then I tried SuSE and found it to be a very nice distro, and it became my desktop distro of choice. I had only minimal exposure to Debian/potato. I just upgraded my server to the testing/sarge distro, and have to wonder why any experienced user would live with the many issues I encountered in the above distros, including utilities that didn't work, poorly tested packages, and unresolveable system slowdowns. All of the above distros are very nice if you have little or no experience with gnu/linux, but I can't tell you how impressed I am with debian. It still has a lot of legs left in it, and kde has advanced to the point where many of the Mandrake Control Center/YaST tools are redundant. The only extra package I installed for convenience was synaptic. I have also replaced my desktop with debian. debian testing, and unstable for that matter, seems more stable than Mandrake or FC (I haven't tried FC2 or SuSE 9.1 so can't comment on them). And to the writer of the article, enough of the gnome 2.6 bashing. We all get the point - a lot of people don't like it, but it is a matter of choice isn't it? And a lot of the nautilus issues have been worked out, such as browsing SMB shares. Lighten up Francis!
I just upgraded my FC1 installation to FC2. What I'm noticing is how many things have been improved but not to the point where I can say that I've used no better desktop systems. Unfortunately the problems I notice exist in virtually every GNU/Linux distribution, so they don't all have to do with FC2 per se. A little about me: I am a programmer and quite familiar with the benefits of having software freedom. I understand a lot of the underlying technical issues for making an OS that "just works". As I grow older I no longer care about following the details. My attention turns toward bigger picture items now, like how can I easily make backups of my documents, how can I easily uninstall software, how can I easily move from one application to its competitor.
I am becoming a firm believer in clean installs rather than upgrades because upgrades so often just don't work. No operaing system provides everything you need, so people routinely install third-party software and even on MacOS X (which is touted as being far simpler and far more unified, hence far better for the desktop user) I have not yet known anyone to be able to avoid problems with system upgrades. Clean installs also offer people a chance to do something they too often never do: make backups.
Some of the major issues I've come across: touch-click trackpad support is gone (where you can touch the trackpad twice in succession as an alternative way of clicking the left mouse button). I never knew how much I missed it until I tried a friend's Apple iBook running MacOS X which does not have it and has no readily apparent way to turn this on. I thought this feature would be there in FC2 final release (it wasn't there in prereleases) and it apparently isn't there. I've been told that this is a Linux kernal feature so if I want the feature back I would have to become out of sync with kernel upgrades supplied by the Fedora Core project and lose the ability to easily upgrade my kernel via FC's up2date. I don't care how easy it is to recompile a kernel once you've gotten the swing of it, I've got much more important issues on my plate and, while I appreciate the software freedom aspect of the Linux kernal, I value my time; I value being able to get on with what I use a computer to do. I'm looking to make things easier on myself, not introduce more maintenance.
The sound system in GNU/Linux is still not unified and smoothly working. I still can't be sure that I can simultaneously play bzflag while listening to some Ogg Vorbis files (or a streamed downloaded) with XMMS or Rhythmbox. On other systems (like later versions of NeXTSTEP and most if not all versions of MacOS X), sound is easy to use and simultaneous sound sources work right out of the box. This is one area of desktop usage where I am content to dissuade letting a thousand flowers bloom (in terms of what is shipped to the end-user) because I would prefer instead to have a single simple (no-setup-needed, it just works right out of the box) sound system. But I don't know (or care to learn) the technical details which prevent this from working smoothly. I figure that this is something that should be provided by any distribution. Recording sound is also a mess: the GNOME sound recorder program still crashes in such a way that no Bug Buddy is brought up to help me easily submit a crash report to the developers and there are way too many sliders on the sound volume panel to know what I want to do without having to learn grotty details about something I should be able to just use. I doubt this situation would remain acceptable if measured against its competition on other operating systems.
I understand that some users want e-mail and calendar integration, so Evolution looks like an attractive program. I think more users want trainable spam filtering and I don't see where Evolution 1.4 (the version of Evolution I got with FC2) provides trainable spam filtering. So Evolution is a non-starter for me. I'll take Mozilla mail or Thunderbird over Evolution because I don't co
Digital Citizen
Realizing that every time I try to blindly poke around at this drive, I risk further corrupting an already bad situation, I've taken the 80gig drive offline and tossed in a 10gigger to limp my sorry un-backed-up butt along, hoping that I'll find a tool to recover my data.
I'd say, #1 this was a major partition table screw-up as you shouldn't be able to redefine the file system format without unmounting your partition even if you are root, and #2 I still haven't been able to recover my files.
If anyone would like to offer advice, I'll be more than willing to listen, but the data recovery services I've called sound rather shifty and unprofessional over the phone, and the only program I've found that might be of some use runs only under (of all things) Windows. I can't even run Windows properly anymore because I don't have the driver disks for this motherboard. (It won't even access the NIC.)
Since I have no access to my data, from my perspective a partition table screwup has resulted in severe data loss, and how anyone could mod you as informative is beyond me.
Windows XP can handle this trivial process with ease....why not FC2?
Disclaimer: I haven't actually tried FC2, and don't plan to.
That said, it isn't a trivial process, and XP didn't handle it with ease. XP had major bugs with its integrated CD writing software, ones that resulted in data loss. I'm guessing it might have even been a driver issue, because I've helped out people that used different burner software but still had odd problems like entries showing up, but actual files that aren't "found" attempting access from the CD. Luckily Windows has a healthy amount of third-party CD burning software, so the users went out and bought Roxio, for example, and solved the problem (sort of - it's still hit-or-miss in terms of producing a disc that read-able on other systems).
What I do know is that CD burning on Linux happens when three pieces are in place: Kernel drivers, CD -R/RW back-end software, and front-end software. As of kernel 2.4, the IDE drivers aren't modern enough to support the proper commands, so a translation layer is required in the form of a kernel module (ide-scsi). A line must be passed to the kernel at boot time so it knows which is the faux SCSI device. If there are real SCSI devices in addition to that (I've got a SCSI system with an IDE burner), it gets a little tricky. Tricky enough that users without pure IDE systems may give up.
The second piece of software, the back-end, was written by a guy named Jörg Schilling. If you happen to be in Berlin and you run across Schilly, make sure you shake his hand and thank him, because he made it possible to burn CDs and DVDs with the neglected, antiquated kernel IDE drivers. The drawback is that it is only able to burn at 8x (Kernel 2.4). However, 'cdrtools' are highly reliable. I've made dozens and dozens of burns with cdrtools and the GCombust front-end, and not one bad burn in the lot.
The third component is, of course, a front-end. Graphical ones such as 'K3B' are the most popular. This is a sticking point for lots of folks: It doesn't matter which you pick, if your system isn't configured properly, none will work, because they all talk to programs in cdrtools (or used to).
Supposedly Kernel 2.6 brought major updates to IDE drivers, and ATAPI support should work properly without the stupid emulation layer. How this effects cdrtools I do not know, because I faced so many incompatibility issues to update my core system to work with 2.6, that I decided to let things mature before I jump on the bandwagon. I know of no major bugs in cdrtools 2.0 that would break CD burning in a manner that you describe. My guess is the problem lies with kernel configuration. If RedHat is using cdrtools as the backend (they'd be insane not to), the 'cdrecord -scanbus' option is a handy tool to have while troubleshooting.
General rant about CD writing software:
I hate with a passion shell-integrated front-ends, like XP's (looks like RedHat's is on my list too), because forcing CD writing as an analog to random-writes-with-a-single-filesystem, a la fixed disk writes, is an interface mistake that generates confusion as well as ruined CDs. GCombust isn't pretty, but does have a stripped-down interface with option tabs which divide different tasks into some fairly logical categories. Before I actually burn a disc, I've got my "ducks in a row"; My default options include Rock Ridge + Anon. Rock Ridge + Joliet. Everyone can read my discs. On the other hand, I've had to troubleshoot Windows and MacOS 10 users' discs that either won't read on other platforms, or in the case of some Windows burning software, won't even read on other Windows systems! What's worse is that the Windows/Mac software hides the filesystem options from users, apparently to simplify the interface, so the steps to correct the problem are non-intuitive. MacOS 10 allows the user to build the image before committing it to disk, but the image shows up as media on the desktop, so there's some ambiguity surrounding the issue of whether the C
Fred
"A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
-RMS
Now should this bother you more or less?
They knowingly released fedora core 2 with what I would consider a "show stopper". I don't even duel boot my linux machine but the idea that RedHat was willing to release this as gold when this bug was present indicates release schedules are more important than quality to them. For me that is a philisophical gap that can not be bridged. I know for certain that I am not upgrading my FC 1 system to FC 2 so now I am exploring my options.
I miss the Karma Whores.
Ctrl + L will open the filename box, with autocomplete and all.
It's useless. Let's see...nowhere in the dialog box does it say to use ctrl-L to open a text box (I've played around with gedit before, out of curiosity, and I didn't know this keystroke until I read it in this thread). Ctrl-L also means extra typing, and you can't access the rest of the open dialog while the ctrl-L box is open.
Of course, the ctrl-L box is the only way to go to a directory without having to click your way through the filesystem (an extremely slow task) or type part of a file's name and have the file selected, which makes the two most important features of a file open dialog useless.
Here are some other horrible ``features'' of the Gnome 2.6 file selector, which are mostly inherited from the previous one:
No way to create your own filter. You're stuck with the ones that come with the app.
The file listing is purely vertical, which wastes space and makes navigation a pain (and what's up with the modification dates?). The above complaint about no filter creation only makes this worse. Conversely, the preset location panel is way too big, also wasting space.
I'm sure I'll think of more things I hate about this file dialog after I post this, but I think this is enough...for now.
I'll also add that I'll not be happy until the Gnome devs just decide to completely ape KDE's file selector. I love using KDE's file selector, and IMO, it's what every other file selector should base itself on.
I support the Center for Consumer Freedom
My personal impression, summed up in one word: Patchwork.
I really appreciate the seamless consistency of KDE. It really annoys me to work in the inconsistent environment that is Gnome. I don't have time to fight the environment to make it look/feel the way I need it to (i.e. consistent).
For example, if you have clients -- say a CPA firm -- and they express how sick they are of Microsoft, and would you recommend an alternative (when this first happened to me, I tried to pinch myself and wake up, then picked my jaw off the floor). Now imagine what you're going to recommend: Gnome? No way in hell. Not when KDE offers magnitudes greater user-friendliness (read: consistency). Come on, be honest.
Gnome is written by geeks, for geeks. A lot would have to change for that to not be true. Even Novell, who purchased Ximian, aren't touching the SuSE formula (i.e. KDE is still the default).
I recently decided to migrate my girlfriend to a more user friendly linux distro. She had been using Gentoo for quite a while, but it was left up to me to do all the manual configurations, software updates, and installs. I wanted to give her something that she could use herself until she became more familar with the inner workings of linux....thus began my inadvertant testing of 3 major linux distros and one minor one.
First I tried mandrake. It had the repetation of being the most user friendly and I was told that the more recent releases had solved many of the instabilities that I had seen when I first tried it years ago. The install went flawlessly all hardware autodetected and drivers installed. I was simply tickled to death. But that did not last long, mandrake proved to be completely unstable and would hard lock several times a day. Also some "essential" programs for her would crash at the drop of a hat. K3b for example crashed everytime mp3's were dragged into the conversion window. Before it's mentioned all the hardware, ram, etc. was completely tested and perfectly ok. So mandrae flunked royally.
Next I tried Suse having heard many good things about it. Suse was the worst of the distros I tested. On the first install I fell victem to some weird, but not completely uncommon bug that resulted in modules compiled against a different version kernel than the kernel installed being used. Due to how slow the network install is this was a major PITA. Hardware detection was pitiful as well. It set my video card up with vesa drivers any attempt to change the driver to the proper one resulted in a hard lockup. Also sound did not work properly and my integrated NIC (every other distro possessed the module for it) was not supported by the install requiring that I pull a NIC out of another box and put use that instead. Furthermore, Suse has it's own way of doing things, so my knowledge of standard linux configuration was virtually useless.
Being fed up with the "user friendly" distros I was going to opt for a lesser known distro called Arch Linux which would take some amount of setting up, but had a binary package management based on apt that would make the installation quicker than reinstalling Gentoo. Installation was fine, most hardware was fine, standard use of config files....seemed promising. But the sound simply wouldn't work. Oddly enough Arts worked fine and all KDE system sounds worked, but not one media player would cooperate. No matter whether I used arts or tried to tap directly into alsa. Since this was Arch's only drawback, I spent quite a bit ot time trying to debug the setup but eventially admitted defeat. The weirdest thing was that it was somewhat sporadic. I would get it working, but at reboot it would fail again....or even just suddenly give out. A desktop with no sound simply isn't acceptible, so I moved on.
My last attempt was going to be Fedora Core 2. At this point I was irritated enough so that I was very close to just installing XP. Afterall I knew it would work and would probably only crash once a week or so...sort of a middle ground from the previous distros I'd tried. The reason Fedora was my last attempt was because I had tried it years before and it left such a sour taste in my mouth (dependency hell) that I had refused to even consider it up to this point. In short I had very low expectations. However, all devices were detected correctly during a painless and trouble free install. it had a clean interface and most importantly, everything *just worked*. The addition of Apt-get, synaptic, et al. Completely cured the dependancy troubles I had seen previously. Overall besides a few minor annoyances such as lack of default mp3 support and nvidia lagging with a full dri driver for the vid card, it was simply refreshing.
So I recognize that everyones experiences can vary. I don't claim that Fedora Core 2 is perfect for everyones particular setup, but for me it was not just a nice fit...it was the ONLY distro that fit at all.
On a side note, before
Virtually every USB/1394 storage device is a plug-and-go affair. Same for printing devices, etc. Linux is reluctant to do even this...
FC2 detects all my usb devices (mem stick, dvd burner, usb key) and even automounts them without any problems.
OSX 10.1 wouldn't even detect a standard USB CD Burner. In addition my buddy replaced his cd burner on his G4 with a faster cd burner and he could no longer do the following:
1) Boot of CD
2) Install Apps from CD
He was able to use it to play music and read burned data cd's and burn cd's. Quite a bit of lost functionality.
Basically what I'm saying is that OSX is very Apple Centric, using third party stuff usually doesnt work and that Linux is way ahead of OSX in terms of compatibility because it has to. It runs on standard x86 hardware, and has support better than the latest Windows out the box these days.
Hell Windows needs fifty different drivers for a Intel EtherExpress 10/100 NIC, Linux can use one.
Can I get an eye poke?
Dog House Forum
I've been using RH since just before version 5 and as a desktop platform since '98, including FC1 and now FC2. ;) ;) ;)
;)
When I first tried out linux I was swapping between RH and Slackware and I couldn't really find too much of a difference, but this rpm thing looked like it had more potential in it than slack, so I settled on RH.
To begin with the distro was simple, the installer was pretty basic and the desktop was unutterably bad (I was escaping win98 after a disappointing abandonment of the ageing Amiga 1200) and I rarely used it outside of work servers.
Things were markedly improved by the arrival of the first Gnome desktop in RH, even though it was pretty rough and largely useless. I like that a lot of the ideas they were having about desktops back then are still in Gnome, but operating far far better now
I well remember the RPM dependency hell and getting to a point of being able to work around it for most things, the pain of glibc transitions, the 2.2-2.4 jump, rpm binaries that deadlock wildly and all the other little niggles that people jump on RH for. It is by no means perfect.
However, over the period of time I have been using it, RH has become significantly more useful and capable. It is still my platform of choice for server machines, even though I do find the RHEL/Fedora split quite frustrating as a sysadmin on a budget that wants something a little more reliable than a autorebuilt srpm, but without the 24x7 onsite hugging price tag. To be honest I'm half wondering if Bruce Perens' latest efforts at an Enterprise Debian might not be the long term best solution, but we will see. For now RH9+Progeny and RHEL3 are working well together for me and are both supported for a few years to come, so it's not too bad.
Anyway, to Fedora, specifically to Fedora Core 2. I was really quite excited by the plans RH announced for Fedora, it sounded like it was going to end up taking the massive advantage that Debian has, apt, and taking it on community project style. It would free the world from dependency hell by using the weight of the RH legacy and the various excellent third party RPM sites (fedora.us, livna, freshrpms, dag, etc.) to produce a RH like distro with a package list to rival Debian. I am disappointed they haven't really achieved that in any noticeable way, but I understand that changing Fedora from RH's internal Red Hat Linux efforts to a large, distributed development team has got to be hard. I hope they can get there, preferably before the third party sites tear each other apart (you guys! stop fucking with each others packages!).
I've been using FC2 since it was released, both as an upgrade from FC1 and as a fresh reinstall on a box previously running FC1. I like it. I really like it, I am very happy with the direction the Gnome/Freedesktop/XOrg types are pushing things, stuff like hotplug/fam/hal/dbus that is making the machine vastly more aware of itself, which I expect to see spreading beyond the desktop. There are things gone from gnome since the 1.x and 2.2/2.4 days that I miss and would like back, but there are way more things I'm glad to see gone. Spatial nautilus? Love it, I don't like that it opens a bazillion windows, but since they are very easy to kill, two thumbs up. The fact that everything stays exactly where you put it is even better. This *must* be implemented for metacity such that it handles windows with similar aplomb. I know people don't like the spatial concept, but they can turn it off and stop whining
It's nice to see distros making the 2.6 plunge, it's been a very easy transition from 2.4 I think, way easier than some of the previous major changes
So, given that RH Linux and now Fedora have been the platform for my work for the last 6 years, I think it's fair to say that I'm pretty happy with them, even though I did have to defect to Debian at home for the masses of software (but I'd skip back to a Fedora install if it could offer a similar bulk).
Keep going Fedora people, if you build it, they will come
Cheers,
Chris "Ng" Jones
cmsj@tenshu.net
www.tenshu.net
Personally, had it not been for Mandrake I'd still be using Windows. But Mandrake made the transition very easy (an essential part was detecting and mounting my NTFS partitions automatically, as my music was on one and working without music is a bore). Now after a year I don't even dual boot anymore.
With this experience I could probably now switch rather easily to a better respected distribution among Slashdot crowd (Debian and Gentoo seem to be the distributions of choice here), but the thing is, I don't want to. While I do enjoy working with my computer, I don't enjoy working on my computer, that is spending too much time configuring things. Granted if I'd use my box as a server I'd want to do it. But I don't, it's a desktop plus a developement platform for small LAMP/JSP work. And for this purpose it excels. (pun not intended ;-) If all you need to do is for example get Apache (with mod_perl/mod_php) and MySQL up and running, it's a matter of couple urpmi's (via CLI or GUI) and clicking a few buttons in MDK Control Center to get the services running (and naturally making sure your firewall is properly set). And you're done! Granted, I haven't tried Debian or Gentoo but I have a feeling this isn't quite as simple with them (please do correct me if I'm mistaken).
Another issue at least for me is those mentioned "wrong license" packages. While I do understand that for example mp3 support may be (is, even) a legal issue, it doesn't change the fact that most of my music is in the format. When I tried RH9 it really wasn't difficult at all to get Synaptic running and install mp3 support for xmms - however, in my oh so humble opinion, it's annoying and wastes my time. And PLF repositories for Mandrake are godsend, if you need software that's legal status isn't quite clear (not to say pirated though).
So yes, I at least am very happy with Mandrake. And yes, I'm very glad (and not even a bit offended) that it was reccommended to me (not in Slashdot, though). Diversity (even with distributions) is a good thing, right?
but seriously, the only way ive found to dual boot is to do windows first. most linux distros ive tried (slack, redhat, mandrake, suse) will handle the bootloader just fine and leave the windows partition untouched. the worst they usually do is have grub or lilo boot to linux by default, no big deal. windows, on the other hand, has been known (by me at least) to wipe partitions that it doesnt recognize. you are correct when you state that post 9x windows will leave the bootloader alone, but ive found this to only be true involving previous versions of windows, not linux. my experience is that 2k and xp remove anything they can when you install.
another somewhat related oddity ive found is that 2k and xp cd's sometimes refuse to boot on a machine that has had linux writing to the MBR, even after an fdisk
my personal advice to anyone wanting to dual boot is to only do it on a machine they can afford to lose data from. better yet, do it from a clean hard drive and dont waste a lot of time perfecting OS #1 until OS #2 is installed and functioning as well.
use your turn signal! you people act like it's divulging information to the enemy
I share your feelings on Mandrake. I started my linux experience with Redhat 5.2 but found Mandrake (with KDE) a better / easier experience altogether. I didn't have to fight my sound and video card configurations to get them working, etc. Fast forward several years and Mandrake 10 whomps on FC2 in many respects. It is a more complete distro, features many intelligent conveniences (such as Numlock ON kernel module - why hasn't anyone else put that in their distro?).
I have tried Debian (horrendously dated - even SID), gentoo (arcane and too time consuming) and I KEEP ON GOING BACK TO MANDRAKE. I wanted to love FC2...believe me. I ran FC1 and thought it was okay, but not as good as Mandrake 9.2
I tried FC2test3 for several weeks and FC2 final for a couple and just flat gave up. I run Mandrake 10 official now on an HP zd7188cl laptop and on a custom-built Athlon desktop. I LOVE IT! Everything I need works great. Once I figured out how to optimize my urpmi server configs and get the reliable package repositories in place, upgrading for security fixes and adding new software is a snap! (I do it using the command line urpmi app which is just as easy as apt-get). The only thing I wish Mandrake would do is make the package manager gui apps unified (not one to remove and one to install - that's ridiculous) and make it as user-friendly as Synaptic is.
One of the biggest frustrations I had was trying to get Crossover Office 3 running properly under FC2. I have it under Mandrake 10 with absoulutely perfect and very responsive performance. Not so under FC2, with many many issues. And yes, I spent lots of time on the valiant work-around efforts documented by the Codeweavers team. They even scripted in disable functions for problematic aspects of FC2, but it didn't really work.
Long story short, you can try other distros, but you'll always keep on coming back home. I thought it would be cool to give gentoo a shot and I hated it. Similar idea but much better execution is Arch Linux. That is worth your time! Try arch and you may love it. Even in beta it is remarkably stable.
I _am_ going to give Suse 9.1 serious consideration for business use - and if I love it, for my desktop at home. BUT, it will really have to live up to the hype to move me off of Mandrake now that 10.0 official is out.
Another thing about Mandrake and "slashdotter distros" - Mandrake can be used for the most complex of server environments and yet out of the box is the best desktop experience around with minimal fuss. THAT is what makes Mandrake different from "handholder" desktop distros like Linspire and Lycoris that are for the casual user that doesn't want to know the CLI exists.
PS > Bluecurve is FUGlY!
This has got to be the most annoying thing working for a very large corporation heavily invested in Java and Linux (at least in the server space). I can't use a non-IE browser to run our corporate applets (timesheets, travel reservations, as you say). The only non-IE browser you can use is Netscape 4, which is, well Netscape 4. Because of all the marketing surrounding our use of Java and its crossplatform potential (which is absolutely true except in this case), this kind of thing really gets my goat.